Nigerian Civil War
The Nigerian Civil War (6 July 1967 – 15 January 1970), also known as the Biafran War, was a civil war fought between Nigeria and the Republic of Biafra, a secessionist state which had declared its independence from Nigeria in 1967. Nigeria was led by General Yakubu Gowon, and Biafra by Lieutenant Colonel Chukwuemeka "Emeka" Odumegwu Ojukwu.[15] Biafra represented the nationalist aspirations of the Igbo ethnic group, whose leadership felt they could no longer coexist with the federal government dominated by the interests of the Muslim Hausa-Fulanis of Northern Nigeria.[16] The conflict resulted from political, economic, ethnic, cultural and religious tensions which preceded the United Kingdom's formal decolonisation of Nigeria from 1960 to 1963. Immediate causes of the war in 1966 included a military coup, a counter-coup, and anti-Igbo pogroms in Northern Nigeria.[17]
Within a year, Nigerian government troops surrounded Biafra, and captured coastal oil facilities and the city of Port Harcourt. A blockade was imposed as a deliberate policy during the ensuing stalemate which led to the mass starvation of Biafran civilians.[18] During the 2+1⁄2 years of the war, there were about 100,000 overall military casualties, while between 500,000 and 2 million Biafran civilians died of starvation.[19]
Alongside the concurrent Vietnam War, the Nigerian Civil War was one of the first wars in human history to be televised to a global audience.[20] In mid-1968, images of malnourished and starving Biafran children saturated the mass media of Western countries. The plight of the starving Biafrans became a cause célèbre in foreign countries, enabling a significant rise in the funding and prominence of international non-governmental organisations (NGOs). Biafra received international humanitarian aid from civilians during the Biafran airlift, an event which inspired the formation of Doctors Without Borders following the end of the war. The United Kingdom and the Soviet Union were the main supporters of the Nigerian government, while France, Israel (after 1968) and some other countries supported Biafra.[21] The United States' official position was one of neutrality, considering Nigeria as "a responsibility of Britain",[22] but some interpret the refusal to recognise Biafra as favouring the Nigerian government.[23][24]
The war highlighted challenges within pan-Africanism during the early stages of African independence from colonial rule, suggesting that the diverse nature of African peoples may present obstacles to achieving common unity. Additionally, it shed light on initial shortcomings within the Organization of African Unity.[25] The war also resulted in the political marginalization of the Igbo people, as Nigeria has not had another Igbo president since the end of the war, leading some Igbo people to believe they are being unfairly punished for the war.[26] Igbo nationalism has emerged since the end of the war, as well as various neo-Biafran secessionist groups such as the Indigenous People of Biafra and Movement for the Actualization of the Sovereign State of Biafra.[27] All the Post-Biafra groups were aimed at agitating for memories and interest of all easterners.
Background[edit]
Ethnic division[edit]
This civil war can be connected to the colonial amalgamation in 1914 of the Northern Protectorate, Lagos Colony, and Southern Nigeria Protectorate, which was intended for better administration due to the proximity of these protectorates . However, the change did not take into consideration the differences in the culture and religions of the people in each area. Competition for political and economic power exacerbated tensions.[15]
Nigeria gained independence from the United Kingdom on 1 October 1960, with a population of 45.2 million made up of more than 300 differing ethnic and cultural groups . When the colony of Nigeria was created, its three largest ethnic groups were the Igbo, who formed about 60–70% of the population in the southeast;[28] the Hausa-Fulani of the Sokoto Caliphate, who formed about 67% of the population in the northern part of the territory;[29] and the Yoruba, who formed about 75% of the population in the southwest.[30] Although these groups have their homelands, by the 1960s, the people were dispersed across Nigeria, with all three ethnic groups represented substantially in major cities. When the war broke out in 1967, there were still 5,000 Igbos in Lagos.[31]
The semi-feudal and Muslim Hausa-Fulani in the north were traditionally ruled by a conservative Islamic hierarchy consisting of emirs who in turn owed their ultimate allegiance to the Sultan of Sokoto, whom they regarded as the source of all political power and religious authority.[30] Apart from the Hausa-Fulani, the Kanuri were another dominant majority Muslim ethnic group that had key figures in the war. They made up about 5% of Nigeria's population and were the dominant ethnic group in the North-Eastern state. They historically successfully resisted the Sokoto Caliphate during the 19th-century through their millennium-long Kanem-Bornu empire. The southernmost part of the region known as the Middle Belt had large populations of Christian and Animist populations. Through missionary activities and the 'Northernisation' policy of the Regional Government, the subregion had a significant western-educated population. Several key figures on the Nigerian side of the war came from this subregion, such as Yakubu Gowon and Theophilus Danjuma, both of whom are Christians.[32]
The Yoruba political system in the southwest, like that of the Hausa-Fulani, also consisted of a series of monarchs, the Oba. The Yoruba monarchs, however, were less autocratic than those in the north.[33] The political and social system of the Yoruba accordingly allowed for greater upward mobility, based on acquired rather than inherited wealth and title.[34]
In contrast to the two other groups, Igbos and the ethnic groups of the Niger Delta in the southeast lived mostly in autonomous, democratically organised communities, although there were Eze or monarchs in many of the ancient cities, such as the Kingdom of Nri. At its zenith, the Kingdom controlled most of Igboland, including influence on the Anioma people, Arochukwu (which controlled slavery in Igbo), and Onitsha territory. Unlike the other two regions, decisions within the Igbo communities were made by a general assembly in which men and women participated.[35] Considering this participation by women in this civil war, the study Female fighters and the fates of rebellions: How mobilizing women influences conflict duration by Reed M. Wood oberved that there was a longer duration of wars between rebel groups and the number of women that participated within the conflict at hand. In discussing the correlation between conflicts of longer duration and a high rate of participation of women, the study suggests that gender norms and the general ways in which "an armed group recruits as well as who it recruits may subsequently influence its behaviors during the conflict and the manner in which the conflict unfolds."[36]
The differing political systems and structures reflected and produced divergent customs and values. The Hausa-Fulani commoners, having contact with the political system only through a village head designated by the emir or one of his subordinates, did not view political leaders as amenable to influence. Political decisions were to be submitted to. As with many other authoritarian religious and political systems, leadership positions were given to persons willing to be subservient and loyal to superiors. A chief function of this political system in this context was to maintain conservative values, which caused many Hausa-Fulani to view economic and social innovation as subversive or sacrilegious.[37]
In contrast to the Hausa-Fulani, the Igbos and other Biafrans often participated directly in the decisions which affected their lives. They had a lively awareness of the political system and regarded it as an instrument for achieving their personal goals. Status was acquired through the ability to arbitrate disputes that might arise in the village, and through acquiring rather than inheriting wealth.[38] The Igbo had been substantially victimised in the Atlantic slave trade; in the year 1790, it was reported that of 20,000 people sold each year from Bonny, 16,000 were Igbo.[39] With their emphasis upon social achievement and political participation, the Igbo adapted to and challenged colonial rule in innovative ways.[15]
These tradition-derived differences were perpetuated and perhaps enhanced by the colonial government in Nigeria. In the north, the colonial government found it convenient to rule indirectly through the emirs, thus perpetuating rather than changing the indigenous authoritarian political system. Christian missionaries were excluded from the north, and the area thus remained virtually closed to European cultural influence.[40] By contrast, the richest of the Igbo often sent their sons to British universities, with the intention of preparing them to work with the British. During the ensuing years, the northern emirs maintained their traditional political and religious institutions, while reinforcing their social structure. At the time of independence in 1960, the north was by far the most underdeveloped area in Nigeria. It had an English literacy rate of 2%, as compared to 19.2% in the east (literacy in Ajami, local languages in Arabic script, learned in connection with religious education, was much higher). The west also enjoyed a much higher literacy level, as it was the first part of the country to have contact with western education and established a free primary education program under the pre-independence Western Regional Government.[41][42]
In the west, the missionaries rapidly introduced Western forms of education. Consequently, the Yoruba were the first group in Nigeria to adopt Western bureaucratic social norms. They made up the first classes of African civil servants, doctors, lawyers, and other technicians and professionals.[43]
Missionaries were introduced at a later date in eastern areas because the British experienced difficulty establishing firm control over the highly autonomous communities there.[44] However, the Igbo and other Biafran people actively embraced Western education, and they overwhelmingly came to adopt Christianity. Population pressure in the Igbo homeland, combined with aspirations for monetary wages, drove thousands of Igbos to other parts of Nigeria in search of work. By the 1960s, Igbo political culture was more unified and the region relatively prosperous, with tradesmen and literate elites active not just in the traditionally Igbo east, but throughout Nigeria.[45] By 1966, the traditional ethnic and religious differences between northerners and the Igbo were exacerbated by new differences in education and economic class.[46][16]
Politics and economics of federalism[edit]
The colonial administration divided Nigeria into three regions—North, West and East—something which exacerbated the already well-developed economic, political, and social differences among Nigeria's different ethnic groups. The country was divided in such a way that the North had a slightly higher population than the other two regions combined. There were also widespread reports of fraud during Nigeria's first census,[47] and even today population remains a highly political issue in Nigeria. On this basis, the Northern Region was allocated a majority of the seats in the Federal Legislature established by the colonial authorities. Within each of the three regions the dominant ethnic groups, the Hausa-Fulani, Yoruba, and Igbo, respectively formed political parties that were largely regional and based on ethnic allegiances: the Northern People's Congress (NPC) in the North; the Action Group in the West (AG); and the National Council of Nigeria and the Cameroons (NCNC) in the East. Although these parties were not exclusively homogeneous in terms of their ethnic or regional make-up, the disintegration of Nigeria resulted largely from the fact that these parties were primarily based in one region and one tribe.[15][48]
The basis of modern Nigeria formed in 1914 when the United Kingdom amalgamated the Northern and Southern protectorates. Beginning with the Northern Protectorate, the British implemented a system of indirect rule of which they exerted influence through alliances with local forces. This system worked so well, Colonial Governor Frederick Lugard successfully lobbied to extend it to the Southern Protectorate through amalgamation. In this way, a foreign and hierarchical system of governance was imposed on the Igbos.[49] Intellectuals began to agitate for greater rights and independence.[50] The size of this intellectual class increased significantly in the 1950s, with the massive expansion of the national education program.[51] During the 1940s and 1950s, the Igbo and Yoruba parties were in the forefront of the campaign for independence from British rule. Northern leaders, fearful that independence would mean political and economic domination by the more Westernized elites in the South, preferred the continuation of British rule. As a condition for accepting independence, they demanded that the country continue to be divided into three regions with the North having a clear majority. Igbo and Yoruba leaders, anxious to obtain an independent country at all costs, accepted the Northern demands.[52][53]
However, the two Southern regions had significant cultural and ideological differences, leading to discord between the two Southern political parties. Firstly, the AG favoured a loose confederacy of regions in the emergent Nigerian nation whereby each region would be in total control of its own distinct territory. The status of Lagos was a sore point for the AG, which did not want Lagos, a Yoruba town situated in Western Nigeria (which was at that time the federal capital and seat of national government) to be designated as the capital of Nigeria, if it meant loss of Yoruba sovereignty. The AG insisted that Lagos must be completely recognised as a Yoruba town without any loss of identity, control or autonomy by the Yoruba. Contrary to this position, the NCNC was anxious to declare Lagos, by virtue of it being the "Federal Capital Territory" as "no man's land"—a declaration which as could be expected angered the AG, which offered to help fund the development of another territory in Nigeria as "Federal Capital Territory" and then threatened secession from Nigeria if it didn't get its way. The threat of secession by the AG was tabled, documented and recorded in numerous constitutional conferences, including the constitutional conference held in London in 1954 with the demand that a right of secession be enshrined in the constitution of the emerging Nigerian nation to allow any part of the emergent nation to opt out of Nigeria, should the need arise.[54] This proposal for inclusion of right of secession by the regions in independent Nigeria by the AG was rejected and resisted by NCNC which vehemently argued for a tightly bound united/unitary structured nation because it viewed the provision of a secession clause as detrimental to the formation of a unitary Nigerian state. In the face of sustained opposition by the NCNC delegates, later joined by the NPC and backed by threats to view maintenance of the inclusion of secession by the AG as treasonable by the British, the AG was forced to renounce its position of inclusion of the right of secession a part of the Nigerian constitution. Had such a provision been made in the Nigerian constitution, later events which led to the Nigerian/Biafran civil war may have been avoided. The pre-independence alliance between the NCNC and the NPC against the aspirations of the AG would later set the tone for political governance of independent Nigeria by the NCNC/NPC and lead to disaster in later years in Nigeria.[55][56]
Northern–Southern tension manifested firstly in the 1945 Jos riots[17] and again on 1 May 1953, as fighting in the Northern city of Kano.[57] The political parties tended to focus on building power in their own regions, resulting in an incoherent and disunified dynamic in the federal government.[58]
In 1946, the British divided the Southern Region into the Western Region and the Eastern Region. Each government was entitled to collect royalties from resources extracted within its area. This changed in 1956 when Shell-BP found large petroleum deposits in the Eastern region. A Commission led by Sir Jeremy Raisman and Ronald Tress determined that resource royalties would now enter a "Distributable Pools Account" with the money split between different parts of government (50% to region of origin, 20% to federal government, 30% to other regions).[59] To ensure continuing influence, the British government promoted unity in the Northern bloc and secessionist sentiments among and within the two Southern regions. The Nigerian government, following independence, promoted discord in the West with the creation of a new Mid-Western Region in an area with oil potential.[60] The new constitution of 1946 also proclaimed that "The entire property in and control of all mineral oils, in, under, or upon any lands, in Nigeria, and of all rivers, streams, and watercourses throughout Nigeria, is and shall be vested in, the Crown."[61] The United Kingdom profited significantly from a fivefold rise in Nigerian exports amidst the post-war economic boom.[62]
International involvement[edit]
United Kingdom[edit]
The United Kingdom had planned to maintain and expand its supply of cheap high-quality oil from Nigeria. Therefore, it placed a high priority on maintenance of oil extraction and refining operations. The war broke out just a week before the Six-Day War in the Middle East, forcing oil tankers from the Middle East to use the long route around the Cape of Good Hope, thereby increasing the cost of Middle Eastern oil. In turn, this increased the importance of Nigerian oil to the United Kingdom, because Nigerian oil was cheaper than Persian Gulf oil.[140] Initially, when it was unclear which side would prevail, the United Kingdom took a "wait and see" approach before opting decisively for Nigeria.[141] Nigeria had a navy of only six vessels, the largest of which was a frigate; an air force of 76 planes, none of which were fighters or bombers; and an army of 7,000 men with no tanks and a shortage of officers with command experience. Though Biafra was likewise similarly weak, the two sides appeared evenly matched at the beginning of the war, and Nigerian victory was by no means considered preordained.[142]
The United Kingdom backed the Federal Government but, when the war broke out, cautioned them not to damage British oil installations in the East. These oilworks, under the control of the Shell-BP Petroleum Development Company (jointly owned by Shell and British Petroleum), controlled 84 per cent of Nigeria's 580,000 barrels per day. Two-thirds of this oil came from the Eastern region, and another third from the newly created Mid-West region. Two-fifths of all Nigerian oil ended up in the United Kingdom.[102] In 1967, 30 per cent of the oil being imported into the United Kingdom came from Nigeria.[143]
Shell-BP therefore considered carefully a request by the Federal Government that it refuse to pay the royalties demanded by Biafra. Its lawyers advised that payment to Biafra would be appropriate if this government did in fact maintain law and order in the region in question. The British government advised that paying Biafra could undermine the goodwill of the Federal Government. Shell-BP made the payment, and the government established a blockade on oil exports.[102] Forced to choose a side, Shell-BP and the British government threw in their lot with the Federal Government in Lagos, apparently calculating that this side would be more likely to win the war.[144] As the British High Commissioner in Lagos wrote to the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Affairs on 27 July 1967:
Kwale oilfield incident[edit]
In May 1969 a company of Biafran commandos raided an oil field in Kwale and killed 11 Saipem workers and Agip technicians. They captured three Europeans unhurt and then at a nearby Okpai Field Development Biafran commandos surrounded and captured 15 more expatriate personnel. The captives included 14 Italians, 3 West Germans and one Lebanese. It was claimed that the foreigners were captured fighting alongside Nigerians against Biafran troops and that they assisted Nigerians in constructing roads to aid them in their operations against Biafra. They were tried by a Biafran court and sentenced to death.[243]
This incident caused an international uproar. In the month that followed Pope Paul VI, the governments of Italy, the United Kingdom and the United States of America mounted concerted pressure on Biafra. On 4 June 1969, after receiving a personal direct mail from the Pope, Ojukwu pardoned the foreigners. They were released to the special envoys sent by the governments of Ivory Coast and Gabon and left Biafra.[244][245]